Shore's Future not so bright

I guess I thought that the nsmb represented all riders and that this was different from TAP. so that the work was limited to Grouse and Seymour, but not the representing. Does that make sense? It just seems weird to me that they are called North Shore but are really on 2 of the three mountains.

I guess I thought that the nsmb represented all riders and that this was different from TAP. so that the work was limited to Grouse and Seymour, but not the representing. Does that make sense? It just seems weird to me that they are called North Shore but are really on 2 of the three mountains.

You realize that NSMB (this website) is not the same as NSMBA (trail organization)?

I was trying to find the 2013 NSMBA AGM write up but it doesn't appear to be on the new site. (The 2012 is there and it talks about Cypress, but obviously that isn't the most current information.)

Edit:
Scroll towards the bottom of the page for the 2012 AGM Cypress update:
http://nsmba.ca/content/2012-12_agm-2012-recap

There is much better progression and variety on the Shore than there ever has been. But, the ratio of black trails to other trails is still extremely high. Do you think ski hills would be as popular if they had this amount of black runs? Even a so called "extreme" mountain such as Jackson Hole only has 50% black diamond runs.

Expresso is the most popular trail on the Shore. The majority of people have shown what they want. Once these same people get comfortable on Expresso, these is PLENTY of progression on other trails.

Sounds like the OP just wants to keep the Shore super gnarly for him and his buddies, and exclude everyone else who likes to mountain bike.

I like that the Shore is predominantly black diamond, but I don't have any problem with a few easier trails and more variety. I can't ever imagine it won't be predominantly black diamond….

Sounds like the OP just wants to keep the Shore super gnarly for him and his buddies, and exclude everyone else who likes to mountain bike.

i don't think that's what the op or the "vocal minority" want either. most riders will recognize and agree that since basically day one the shore has had a definite lack of beginner friendly trails when taken against the bike tech of the day. but that's a big part of the mystique of the shore that exists pretty much everywhere - the shore is not a land of green trails and bunnies that fart rainbows. i'd say that the majority of these people also recognize a need for true beginner/intermediate trails but the issue is where and how those trails are being developed.

i think the nsmb TAP team did a great thing by going to the riding public and seeking input on how to deal with the trail knowing full well they weren't going to keep everybody happy. there needs to be more of that and there needs to be compromise on both sides of the debate. the gnarcores need to accept that sometimes some sections of trail have to get re-worked that will result in an easier section of trail and the flowcores need to appreciate the desire to keep some challenging thing challenging. the only way this happens though is with reasoned discussion.

i accept the idea of builder's choice, but if a trail with no recognized/historical builder is getting altered then maybe the riding public should be allowed to have some input. i've said before that having some sort of plan that dictates the direction trail work will take on certain trails would go a long way towards settling down the disagreement that exists. maybe having a chat forum on trail maintenance that is tightly moderated and only open at set times (for example: on Thur May 15th from 7-9pm there will be a discussion about the upcoming trail work on Ned's). before hand post up the general plan of what's going to happen and then let people have input. or even better host an on-site trail meeting to discuss what's going on. if it's really important, people will show up.

i'd say that the majority of these people also recognize a need for true beginner/intermediate trails but the issue is where and how those trails are being developed.

Fair enough. Perhaps a long-term plan could be announced? For example "our long term goal is for 10% green, 40% blue, 40% black, 10% double-black. These xxx gnarly blacks are going to become blue, but these xxx trails will stay black and double-black".

i accept the idea of builder's choice, but if a trail with no recognized/historical builder is getting altered then maybe the riding public should be allowed to have some input. i've said before that having some sort of plan that dictates the direction trail work will take on certain trails would go a long way towards settling down the disagreement that exists. maybe having a chat forum on trail maintenance that is tightly moderated and only open at set times (for example: on Thur May 15th from 7-9pm there will be a discussion about the upcoming trail work on Ned's). before hand post up the general plan of what's going to happen and then let people have input. or even better host an on-site trail meeting to discuss what's going on. if it's really important, people will show up.

Under the TAP each of the Trail Builders have to do a trail assessment report that sets out the work we plan to do on the trail for the year. I know the first year of TAP these reports were made public access on the nsmba website.

This year I posted my work report on our Muddbunnies website and post each of my trail day reports there as well. This way everyone knows what the hell I'm up to (and can contact me if they have any questions/opinions/complaints)

So yeah, I think transparency is important. People care and want to know what is going on.

There was a public open house on May 13 for any questions to be answered. Anyone that didn't show up then is welcome to come to a trailday and ask.

Fair enough. Perhaps a long-term plan could be announced? For example "our long term goal is for 10% green, 40% blue, 40% black, 10% double-black. These xxx gnarly blacks are going to become blue, but these xxx trails will stay black and double-black".

But can the trails be labelled correctly then? Bunny is rated black - seriously? Even the original line was never black and now it's bobsled easy. Bobsled and Bunny should be green. The new Espresso (which should be given a new name as it's not even the same line) is probably a blue-green but I have yet to ride it. Basically the rating should be related to the difficulty of the trail and not a past trail difficulty.

But can the trails be labelled correctly then? Bunny is rated black - seriously? Even the original line was never black and now it's bobsled easy. Bobsled and Bunny should be green. The new Espresso (which should be given a new name as it's not even the same line) is probably a blue-green but I have yet to ride it. Basically the rating should be related to the difficulty of the trail and not a past trail difficulty.

bobsled is not a green trail, it's a blue. bridle is an example of a green trail.

Basically the rating should be related to the difficulty of the trail and not a past trail difficulty.

Everyone wants to ride the Shore, But no-one wants to ride the Shore.

This is the agreed upon imba rating system that everyone is using. Pat yourself on the back for bring so confident on black diamond trails that you thought they were green. ;)

https://www.imba.com/resources/maps/trail-difficulty-ratings

Bridle used to be black, as very few could ride it end to end without stopping or putting a foot down
I'm afraid for the future of Neds (one of my favourite trails), better plan for lots of natural speed bumps (such as it currently has) since it will become a climbing trail again, resulting in lots of "who has the right of way" conflicts

I prefer the IMBA or old EMP standards to the Whistler standards, in that you can have a flatish black diamond, slow, low to the ground and low consequence trail

Neds is down to hardpan so there really nothing to be done major to the trail. Maybe the odd section rerouted but who knows. I hope Metro doesn't decide to close it down but wouldn't be surprised.

This is the agreed upon imba rating system that everyone is using. Pat yourself on the back for bring so confident on black diamond trails that you thought they were green. ;)

https://www.imba.com/resources/maps/trail-difficulty-ratings

The imba trailrating system doesn't apply equally to all riding areas. Folks who cut their teeth riding in the lower mainland would view most "black diamond" trails elsewhere as light blues.